The support points found a branch point nobody named, and cluster at it by 1.52
At its defaults it draws the support points found a branch point nobody named, and cluster at it by 1.52. Approximating γ√(λ + c) on an interval reaching to within 0.03 of its branch point, by a barycentric rational whose support points are chosen greedily: at each step the sample where the current approximation is worst becomes the next support point. The filled curve is the error against degree; the open one is the same barycentric form with support points spread evenly along the interval, which is the choice anybody makes who has no reason to make another. At degree 10 the adaptive rule is 702.3× better, and the advantage grows with the degree. Nothing in the algorithm is told that the function has a branch point or where it is: the points it selects lie between 0.0962 and 9.53 from it, a span of 99.06, with a mean ratio of 1.519 between consecutive distances — the geometric clustering the hand-built approximant in this field is given as a rule, arrived at from the residual.
aaa-support is one function in lib/figures/graphfit.js —
three approximations the data chose the shape of — support points, a restricted perturbation, and a model made of measurements. Everything below came out of it during this build, at
arguments taken from the essays rather than invented for this page. A figure here is the
figure a reader meets in an essay, and if the generator changes, this page changes with it.
At its defaults
Drawn even though every essay passes arguments — which on this site is every essay, at 100% of placements since the standard pass. A default nothing exercises is a trap for the next essay to call this with none, and this is the page where a default that has drifted from the figures around it becomes visible.
Approximating γ√(λ + c) on an interval reaching to within 0.03 of its branch point, by a barycentric rational whose support points are chosen greedily: at each step the sample where the current approximation is worst becomes the next support point. The filled curve is the error against degree; the open one is the same barycentric form with support points spread evenly along the interval, which is the choice anybody makes who has no reason to make another. At degree 10 the adaptive rule is 702.3× better, and the advantage grows with the degree. Nothing in the algorithm is told that the function has a branch point or where it is: the points it selects lie between 0.0962 and 9.53 from it, a span of 99.06, with a mean ratio of 1.519 between consecutive distances — the geometric clustering the hand-built approximant in this field is given as a rule, arrived at from the residual.
reach: 0.03
The arguments are the ones The points the algorithm chose passes. A value nobody placed would be a picture no essay asked for and no claim was ever checked against.
Approximating γ√(λ + c) on an interval reaching to within 0.03 of its branch point, by a barycentric rational whose support points are chosen greedily: at each step the sample where the current approximation is worst becomes the next support point. The filled curve is the error against degree; the open one is the same barycentric form with support points spread evenly along the interval, which is the choice anybody makes who has no reason to make another. At degree 10 the adaptive rule is 702.3× better, and the advantage grows with the degree. Nothing in the algorithm is told that the function has a branch point or where it is: the points it selects lie between 0.0962 and 9.53 from it, a span of 99.06, with a mean ratio of 1.519 between consecutive distances — the geometric clustering the hand-built approximant in this field is given as a rule, arrived at from the residual.
reach: 0.15
The arguments are the ones The points the algorithm chose passes. A value nobody placed would be a picture no essay asked for and no claim was ever checked against.
Approximating γ√(λ + c) on an interval reaching to within 0.15 of its branch point, by a barycentric rational whose support points are chosen greedily: at each step the sample where the current approximation is worst becomes the next support point. The filled curve is the error against degree; the open one is the same barycentric form with support points spread evenly along the interval, which is the choice anybody makes who has no reason to make another. At degree 10 the adaptive rule is 566.4× better, and the advantage grows with the degree. Nothing in the algorithm is told that the function has a branch point or where it is: the points it selects lie between 0.481 and 9.53 from it, a span of 19.81, with a mean ratio of 1.348 between consecutive distances — the geometric clustering the hand-built approximant in this field is given as a rule, arrived at from the residual.
reach: 0.05
The arguments are the ones The points the algorithm chose passes. A value nobody placed would be a picture no essay asked for and no claim was ever checked against.
Approximating γ√(λ + c) on an interval reaching to within 0.05 of its branch point, by a barycentric rational whose support points are chosen greedily: at each step the sample where the current approximation is worst becomes the next support point. The filled curve is the error against degree; the open one is the same barycentric form with support points spread evenly along the interval, which is the choice anybody makes who has no reason to make another. At degree 10 the adaptive rule is 616.3× better, and the advantage grows with the degree. Nothing in the algorithm is told that the function has a branch point or where it is: the points it selects lie between 0.1603 and 9.53 from it, a span of 59.44, with a mean ratio of 1.45 between consecutive distances — the geometric clustering the hand-built approximant in this field is given as a rule, arrived at from the residual.
reach: 0.02
The arguments are the ones The points the algorithm chose passes. A value nobody placed would be a picture no essay asked for and no claim was ever checked against.
Approximating γ√(λ + c) on an interval reaching to within 0.02 of its branch point, by a barycentric rational whose support points are chosen greedily: at each step the sample where the current approximation is worst becomes the next support point. The filled curve is the error against degree; the open one is the same barycentric form with support points spread evenly along the interval, which is the choice anybody makes who has no reason to make another. At degree 10 the adaptive rule is 747.2× better, and the advantage grows with the degree. Nothing in the algorithm is told that the function has a branch point or where it is: the points it selects lie between 0.06413 and 9.53 from it, a span of 148.6, with a mean ratio of 1.576 between consecutive distances — the geometric clustering the hand-built approximant in this field is given as a rule, arrived at from the residual.
reach: 0.008
The arguments are the ones The points the algorithm chose passes. A value nobody placed would be a picture no essay asked for and no claim was ever checked against.
Approximating γ√(λ + c) on an interval reaching to within 0.008 of its branch point, by a barycentric rational whose support points are chosen greedily: at each step the sample where the current approximation is worst becomes the next support point. The filled curve is the error against degree; the open one is the same barycentric form with support points spread evenly along the interval, which is the choice anybody makes who has no reason to make another. At degree 10 the adaptive rule is 812.2× better, and the advantage grows with the degree. Nothing in the algorithm is told that the function has a branch point or where it is: the points it selects lie between 0.02565 and 9.53 from it, a span of 371.5, with a mean ratio of 1.712 between consecutive distances — the geometric clustering the hand-built approximant in this field is given as a rule, arrived at from the residual.
What it checked while drawing
Every figure above checked its own claims on the way to being drawn, and a claim that failed
would have stopped the picture rather than shipped a wrong one. Those checks used to leave
no trace at all: a passing one returned true and the only evidence the figure had
checked anything was that nothing crashed. The list below is what they actually said, collected
by running this generator with an observer installed — not a description of
what it is believed to check.
14 distinct claims across 6 sets of arguments, grouped below by shape — because most of them are one sentence with a different number in it, and how many separate times that sentence was put to the test is the informative part.
the adaptive support beats the even one at degree 5 — checked 6 times
a branch point to the left of the spectrum
a degree the sample set can carry
a size the linearisation can afford
a target interval that stops short of the branch point
a target set that stops short of the branch point
an even spread that lands on distinct samples
and the advantage at the top degree is worth having
the chosen support points cluster geometrically at the branch point
Against the rule
It draws a decomposition and prints its residual. It calls
aaa, evenSupport,
and every figure above carries the badge — which residualcheck verifies by looking
for it in the emitted SVG rather than by finding the call that builds one. A badge that is
constructed and then left out of the body is the failure that check exists for.
Across the library: the rule bites on 217
of 397 generators —
199 print a residual and
18 are exempt with a published reason;
180 factorise nothing.
Read from lib/residual-rule.js, which is the same body the gate enforces from,
and the gate's last check fails the build if this page and it disagree about any generator.
Where it is called
Changing this generator changes every figure on this list. That is what makes the list worth publishing rather than keeping in a check script.